Policy of containment (Truman's Containment policy was the first major

policy during the Cold War and used numerous strategies to prevent the
spread of communism abroad.
Containment was a United States policy using numerous strategies to prevent the spread of communism abroad. A component of the Cold War, this policy was a
response to a series of moves by the Soviet Union to enlarge its communist sphere of influence in Eastern Europe, China, Korea, and Vietnam. It represented a middle-
ground position between dtente and rollback.
The basis of the doctrine was articulated in a 1946 cable by United States diplomat, George F. Kennan (below). As a description of United States foreign policy, the
word originated in a report Kennan submitted to the U.S. defense secretary in 1947a report that was later used in a magazine article.
George F. Kennan was the diplomat behind the doctrine of containment.
He gave the term.
The word containment is associated most strongly with the policies of United States President Harry Truman (194553), including the establishment of the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), a mutual defense pact. Although President Dwight Eisenhower (195361) toyed with the rival doctrine of rollback, he refused to
intervene in the Hungarian Uprising of 1956. President Lyndon Johnson (196369) cited containment as a justification for his policies in Vietnam. President Richard Nixon
(196974), working with his top advisor Henry Kissinger, rejected containment in favor of friendly relations with the Soviet Union and China; this dtente, or relaxation of
tensions, involved expanded trade and cultural contacts.
President Jimmy Carter (197681) emphasized human rights rather than anti-communism, but dropped dtente and returned to containment when the Soviets invaded
Afghanistan in 1979. President Ronald Reagan (198189), denouncing the Soviet state as an "evil empire", escalated the Cold War and promoted rollback in Nicaragua
and Afghanistan. Central programs begun under containment, including NATO and nuclear deterrence, remained in effect even after the end of the war.

and marshall aid plan The Marshall Plan (officially the European Recovery Program, ERP) was an American initiative to
aid Western Europe, in which the United States gave over $12 billion[1] (approximately $120 billion in current dollar value as of June 2016) in
economic support to help rebuild Western European economies after the end of World War II. The plan was in operation for four years beginning
April 8th 1948. The goals of the United States were to rebuild war-devastated regions, remove trade barriers, modernize industry, make Europe
prosperous again, and prevent the spread of communism.[2] The Marshall Plan required a lessening of interstate barriers, a dropping of many
regulations, and encouraged an increase in productivity, labour union membership, as well as the adoption of modern business procedures. [3]

to counter communist eastern europe( European recovery plan) eastern

wing of European countries - president harry s Truman

reconstruction plan to offer the soviet union and its allies with some aid

Realist principle of IR power struggle hans morgen thaw politics among

nations

Liberal organisation (UN) peace can be maintained if nations have mutual

interest and complex interdependencies.

Relative gain (gain vis a vis the other) also an important aspect of realist
school of IR. While liberal school has absolute gain(something is better)
principle

Security interlinked and high (military politics) and low (issues on a

regional basis like global warming, poverty, etc) politics complex
interdependencies

Un was formed to maintain international peace, friendly relations, solving

intl problems, human rights

Un not to rectify problems of ww2 but to take care of post ww2 probs.

Common and differentiated responsibilities - Common but differentiated

responsibilities (CBDR), principle of international environmental law
establishing that all states are responsible for addressing global
environmental destruction yet not equally responsible. The principle
balances, on the one hand, the need for all states to take responsibility for
 global environmental problems and, on the other hand, the need to
recognize the wide differences in levels of economic development
between states. These differences in turn are linked to the states
contributions to, as well as their abilities to address, these problems. CBDR
was formalized in international law at the 1992 United Nations Conference
on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de Janeiro.

Failures of league of nations

Article 11 of the Leagues Covenant stated: Any war or threat of war is a matter of concern to the whole League and the League shall take action that may
safeguard peace. The three most important men at the Versailles Conference - 'the Big Three' - were: Georges Clemenceau, the Prime
Minister of France (2nd right). Woodrow Wilson, the President of America (far right). David Lloyd George, the Prime Minister of Britain
(far left, talking to Orlando, the Prime Minister of Italy). The first crisis the League had to face was in north Italy In 1919, Italian
nationalists, angered that the Big Three had, in their opinion, broken promises to Italy at the Treaty of Versailles, captured the small
port of Fiume. The Treaty of Versailles had given this port to Yugoslavia. For 15 months, an Italian nationalist called dAnnunzio governed
Fiume. The newly created League did nothing. The situation was solved by the Italian government who could not accept that dAnnunzio
was seemingly more popular than they were so they bombarded the port of Fiume and enforced a surrender. In all this the League
played no part despite the fact that it had just been set up with the specific task of maintaining peace.

The next crisis the League faced was at Teschen, which was a small town between Poland and Czechoslovakia. Its main importance was
that it had valuable coalmines there, which both the Poles and the Czechs wanted. As both were newly created nations, both wanted to
make their respective economies as strong as possible and the acquisition of rich coal mines would certainly help in this respect.

In January 1919, Polish and Czech troops fought in the streets of Teschen. Many died. The League was called on to help and decided that
the bulk of the town should go to Poland while Czechoslovakia should have one of Teschens suburbs. This suburb contained the most
valuable coalmines and the Poles refused to accept this decision. Though no more wholesale violence took place, the two countries
continued to argue over the issue for the next twenty years.

Many years before 1920, Vilna had been taken over by Russia. Historically, Vilna had been the capital of Lithuania when the state had
existed in the Middle Ages. After World War One, Lithuania had been re-established and Vilna seemed the natural choice for its capital.

However, by 1920, 30% of the population was from Poland with Lithuanians only making up 2% of the citys population. In 1920, the Poles
seized Vilna. Lithuania asked for League help but the Poles could not be persuaded to leave the city. Vilna stayed in Polish hands until the
outbreak of World War Two. The use of force by the Poles had won.

In 1920, Poland invaded land held by the Russians. The Poles quickly overwhelmed the Russian army and made a swift advance
into Russia. By 1921, the Russians had no choice but to sign the Treaty of Riga, which handed over to Poland nearly 80,000 square
kilometres of Russian land. This one treaty all but doubled the size of Poland.
What did the League do about this violation of another country by Poland?

The answer is simple nothing. Russia by 1919 was communist and this plague from the East was greatly feared by the West. In fact,
Britain, France and America sent troops to attack Russia after the League had been set up. Winston Churchill, the British War Minister,
stated openly that the plan was to strangle Communist Russia at birth. Once again, to outsiders, it seemed as if League members were
selecting which countries were acceptable and ones that were not. The Allied invasion of Russia was a failure and it only served to make
Communist Russia even more antagonistic to the West.

The Treaty of Versailles had ordered Weimar Germany to pay reparations for war damages. These could either be paid in money or in kind
(goods to the value of a set amount). In 1922, the Germans failed to pay an instalment. They claimed that they simply could not rather
than did not want to. The Allies refused to accept this and the anti-German feeling at this time was still strong. Both France and Belgium
believed that some form of strong action was needed to teach Germany a lesson.
In 1923, contrary to League rules, French and Belgian troops invaded the Ruhr Germanys most important industrial zone. Within
Europe, France was seen as a senior League member like Britain and the anti-German feeling that was felt throughout Europe allowed
both France and Belgium to break their own rules as were introduced by the League. Here were two League members clearly breaking
League rules and nothing was done about it.
For the League to enforce its will, it needed the support of its major backers in Europe, Britain and France. Yet France was one of the
invaders and Britain was a major supporter of her. To other nations, it seemed that if you wanted to break League rules, you could. Few
countries criticised what France and Belgium did. But the example they set for others in future years was obvious. The League clearly
failed on this occasion, primarily because it was seen to be involved in breaking its own rules.

The border between Italy and Albania was far from clear and the Treaty of Versailles had never really addressed this issue. It was a
constant source of irritation between both nations.

In 1923, a mixed nationality survey team was sent out to settle the issue. Whilst travelling to the disputed area, the Italian section of the
survey team became separated from the main party. The five Italians were shot by gunmen who had been in hiding.

Italy accused Greece of planning the whole incident and demanded payment of a large fine. Greece refused to pay up. In response, the
Italians sent its navy to the Greek island of Corfu and bombarded the coastline. Greece appealed to the League for help but Italy, led
by Benito Mussolini, persuaded the League via the Conference of Ambassadors, to fine Greece 50 million lire.

To follow up this success, Mussolini invited the Yugoslavian government to discuss ownership of Fiume. The Treaty of Versailles had given
Fiume to Yugoslavia but with the evidence of a bombarded Corfu, the Yugoslavs handed over the port to Italy with little problem.

All of these failures were secondary to the two major ones in the 1930s. What they did show the world was that the League could not
enforce a settlement if it did not have the ability to do so and dictators were keen to exploit this where they could. Prior to the troubles
experienced in Western Europe in the 1930s, the League had to deal with two major problems and it fell down on both
Manchuria andAbyssinia.

Therefore, any conflict between nations, which ended in war and the victory of one state over another, had to be viewed as a failure by the
League.

The United States didn't join - The countries of Europe were bitterly divided after World War I and were in no mood to
establish a substantive organization dedicated to promoting world peace and understanding. The US being an outsider may
have been a stabilizing force to the group. But Congress was uninterested in entangling the US any further in European affairs,
Until the Second World War that is....
The Treaty of Versailles - The terms of the treaty unfairly penalized Germany. Doing so made joining the League more of a
"punishment" than a boon. The establishment of the UN after WWII didn't make the same mistake, which was partly why it
has been successful.
The limited scope of the League - Many countries which would have been beneficial to the League simply weren't invited
to join. As a result it was a boutique organization, rather than a true joining of nations.
The general instability of the League - Many of the founding members simply withdrew from it as it became apparent
that the League was unstable and that its interests clashed with their own.
The myriad failings of the League's diplomacy - The League was unable to prevent foreign incursions or negotiate their
resolutions successfully after they occurred; from the Chaco War of 1922 to the Nazi annexation of Czechoslovakia, the
League's toothless nature was apparent from its outset which grew worse with time.
Colonialism - Colonialism was simply incompatible with the League's existence. While UN managed to survive during
colonialism, it did so in the wake of WWII and during the collapse of colonialism. The League's membership expected (well...
demanded) that their questionable territorial claims were above and apart from its purview. This double standard weakened
the legitimacy of the group and ultimately resulted in its downfall.

The League of Nations was a good idea which was poorly executed. The relative success of the UN is due to the fact that all of the above
actions did NOT occur in the same manner as they did during the time period when the League of Nations was empaneled.

https://www.quora.com/Why-did-the-League-of-Nations-fail Important

file:///E:/United%20Nations%20Global%20Issues.html

Distinction of league of nations and un

1. The league had been installed in the full treaty of Versailles while un
was separated from the peace agreement.
 2. The league of nations was a covenant signed by the govt of the high
contracting parties (The representatives of states who have signed or ratified a
treaty.)while un was about we the people. (the govt represented the people
and the issues)

3. League requires unanimous votes both in the assembly and the council
to pass a resolution. One state says no and resolution is scrapped. Un
differs there. It is more flexible. For any resolution to pass we need to have
9 out of 15 members of security council to approve it. 5/5 perm and 4/10
of unsc)

4. The parties to the conflict despite being a member of the league

wouldnt vote, while un members have no such limitation but unsc
permanent members can exercise veto.

5. Us wasnt a part of league of nations though it was propagated by

Wilson while un had us as an imp member and sponsor with Roosevelt as a
spearhead.

6. No clear division between resp between the main executive committee

(the league council) and the league assembly that had all member states.

7. League could only make recommendations and these recommendations

had to be unanimous.

8. There was no mechanism for coordinating military or economic actions

against miscreant states.

Challenges-

Us was obliged to convince the people in the world that it will play a
significant role in leadership. Wouldnt retreat again.

Un had to make sure that great Britain maintains its power because world
was going to be decolonialized after the ww2 period

Respect and ensure human rights violation dont happen

Give refugee settlement and rehab to war affected people by war

The defeated nations had to be reconstructed and made a part of new

global framework. Marshall aid plan and Molotov plan (The Molotov Plan
was the system created by the Soviet Union in 1947 in order to provide aid
to rebuild the countries in Eastern Europe that were politically and
economically aligned to the Soviet Union

Collective defence un and collective secy - nato

Creation of UN

The seeds were planted in the atlantic charter in august 1941

 Us joined the war

It was spurred and issued by Churchill and Roosevelt

Was said, We need a future intt org for general security

In January 1942, US now in the war, a declaration signed by 26 more

nations, declaration by the united nations by Roosevelt. Reaffirm 1941
charter
The Declaration by the United Nations was a World War II document agreed on 1 January 1942 during the Arcadia Conference by 26
governments: the Allied "Big Four"[1] HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations"
HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations"

(the US, the UK, the USSR, and China), nine other American
HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Declaration_by_United_Nations"[2]

countries in North and Central America and the Caribbean, the four British Dominions, British India, and eight Allied governments-in-exile, for a
total of twenty-six nations.

The Declaration by United Nations, on 1 January 1942, was the basis of the modern UN. collective security against the axis powers
(germany, Italy and japan)

Collective security war against one is a war against all.

A meeting in Moscow in 1943 (conference), Moscow declaration

foreign mins of us china uk ussr. General secy, explicitly recognising the
earliest practicable date.

Dumbarton oaks conference - The Dumbarton Oaks Conference or, more formally, the Washington
Conversations on International Peace and Security Organization was an international conference at which theUnited HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Nations" Nations was formulated and negotiated among international leaders. The conference was held
at Dumbarton Oaks from August 21, 1944, to October 7, 1944. 2 series purpose key steps to structure Into 12 ch

Yalta conference for veto powers (absolute powers given to 5

superpowers) dont get veto on procedural matters big three

league of nations mandate later un trust territory were certain

territories transferred from the control of certain countries to A League of
Nations mandate was a legal status for certain territories transferred from the control of one
country to another following World War I, or the legal instruments that contained the
internationally agreed-upon terms for administering the territory on behalf of the League.

A United Nations Security Council resolution is a UN resolution adopted by the fifteen

members of the Security Council; the UN body charged with "primary responsibility for the
maintenance of international peace and security".
The UN Charter specifies (in Article 27) that a draft resolution on non-procedural matters is
adopted if nine or more of the fifteen Council members vote for the resolution, and if it is not
vetoed by any of the five permanent members. Draft resolutions on "procedural matters" can
be adopted on the basis of an affirmative vote by any nine Council members.
The five permanent members are the People's Republic of China (which replaced the
Republic of China in 1971), France, Russia (which replaced the defunct Soviet Union in
1991), the United Kingdom, and the United States.
Vote and Majority Required
Article 27 of the UN Charter states that:
1. Each member of the Security Council shall have one vote.
2. Decisions of the Security Council on procedural matters shall be made by an
affirmative vote of nine members. any 9
3. Decisions of the Security Council on all other matters shall be made by an affirmative
vote of nine members including the concurring votes of the permanent members;
provided that, in decisions under Chapter VI, and under paragraph 3 of Article 52, a
party to a dispute shall abstain from voting.
The Right to Veto
The creators of the United Nations Charter conceived that five countries China, France,
the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) [which was succeeded in 1990 by the
Russian Federation], the United Kingdom and the United States , because of their key roles
in the establishment of the United Nations, would continue to play important roles in the
maintenance of international peace and security. They were granted the special status of
Permanent Member States at the Security Council, along with a special voting power known
as the "right to veto". It was agreed by the drafters that if any one of the five permanent
members cast a negative vote in the 15-member Security Council, the resolution or decision
would not be approved.
All five permanent members have exercised the right of veto at one time or another. If a
permanent member does not fully agree with a proposed resolution but does notwish to cast a
veto, it may choose to abstain, thus allowing the resolution to be adopted if it obtains the
required number of nine favourable votes.

If its a non proc, and one perm member abstains from voting still
can be passed. 9/15 then

Non Proc security issues, Proc Administrative

Bretton woods conference(The Bretton Woods Conference, formally known as the United
Nations Monetary and Financial Conference, was the gathering of 730 delegates from all
44 Allied nations at the Mount Washington Hotel, situated in Bretton Woods, New
Hampshire, United States, to regulate the international monetary and financial order after the
conclusion of World War II.[1]
The conference was held from July 122, 1944. Agreements were signed that, after legislative
ratification by member governments, established the International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development (IBRD) and the International Monetary Fund (IMF).
The Bretton Woods Conference had three main results: (1) Articles of
Agreement to create the IMF, whose purpose was to promote stability of
exchange rates and financial flows. (2) Articles of Agreement to create the
IBRD, whose purpose was to speed reconstruction after the Second World
War and to foster economic development, especially through lending to
build infrastructure. (3) Other recommendations for international economic
cooperation. The Final Act of the conference incorporated these
agreements and recommendations.)
 San Francisco conference (On 25 April 1945, delegations from 50 Allied
Nations leagued together in San Francisco, United States of America. Main
purpose of this convention was to draft a document in order to promote
lasting peace and prevent future conflict by creating an international
platform more effective than the League of Nations. Reserve peace all and
prevent any further World War. During the conference delegates in each
drafting chamber, participated in heated debates regarding topics varying
from the Economic and Social Council to the prevention against the use of
force, from the Security Council to the Trusteeship System; everything
about the UN was created in two months.)

Quebec 1943 quadrant to approach four policemen and regional councils

Churchill thought of regional councils

1943 embryonic phase of un

Ostensible and legitimacy of use of force by secy council on the

pretext of breach of peace and collective self defence.

1960 most number of countries admitted -17 after 1945s 51 states.

Un members after 2000s-

2000-tuvalu,federal republic of Yugoslavia, Serbia and Montenegro, then

Serbia (sep)

2002-switzerland, east timor

2006-montenegro (sep)

2011-south sudan

Principles of un-

sovereign equality for all member states (The only limitation in ch-7
action that the un takes with respect to intl peace if breach of treaty of
peace happens)( military force in the case of threat, breach of peace, act
of aggression of one state on other)

good faith fulfilment of all obligations assumed in accordance with the

charter. This was intended to express the importance of the general
international law principle of good faith and the expectation that the
members would take seriously their obligations arising out of the charter.

The duty to settle intl disputes by peaceful means in such a manner that
international peace and secy and justice arent in danger. (Peaceful means
an orientation on consensus; confidence bldg; cooperation; inc
interdependence; legislation of relations are some of the long term
effective measures.)
 Prohibition on the threat and use of force either interstate or other kinds of
force incompatible with the purpose of the un. (only on 2 grounds -
violence right to individual and collective self-defence [pre-emptive
strategy, precautionary rather than reactionary] [in the principle of self
defence] article 51 of un charter ; chapter 7 - the authority of secy
council acc to ch 7 to take measures of enforcement using military
force in the case of a threat to all breach of peace or an act of
aggression. Controversial e.g. us national securitystrategy act
2002 based on the collective self defence and justifies Iraq
invasion of 2003.

The duty to assist in any action taken by the org and to refrain from giving
assistance to any state against which the org is implementing preventive
or enforcement measures. (not help the aggressor state and help the un in
supporting the attacked)

The duty of the organisation to ensure that states which are not members
act in accordance with the principles of the charter so far as maybe
necessary for the maintenance of intl peace and secy.

The exclusion of any right of the org to interfere in the matters which are
essentially within the domestic jurisdiction of a state except for cases of
measures under chapter -7

Organisational structures

Article 7 Organs (Except the Intl court of justice, the hague, every other
organ is in new york)

General assembly the membership is universal to all the nation states

and one vote equally. Intergovernmental forum for consultation and
cooperation. Not a world parliament. (no world government) Not binding
but recommendations can be representative of world opinion. Work takes
place in 6 main committees disarmament and intl secy; eco and fin
issues; social, humanitarian and cultural affairs; special pol ques and
issues of decolonialisation; admin and budgetary affairs internal to org;
legal issues all member states represented. (every issue of significance
discussed there and provides recommendations. Early session begins in
Sept led by foreign ministers or secretary of member states. Decisions
require usually a simple majority but in recent years a special effort has
been made to reach decisions through a consensus rather than a formal
vote. For important decisions those listed in article 18 (2) such as selection
of non- permanent members to Security Council or acceptance or rejection
of members two thirds majority. While the general assembly functions
something like the legislature within the org itself and can make decisions
that are binding on the other main bodies such as the secretariat (esp
budgetary matters), and subsidiary bodies those pertaining to the budget.
It enjoys no such authority it its external relations. Its recommendations
create no binding obligations under intl law and thus have no claim on the
 obedience of member states. The assemblys right to discuss any issue
doesnt have any corresponding authority to constitute binding
resolutions. According to the statute the general assembly merely enjoys
the privilege of issuing recommendations on all issues falling under its
purview. Although the general assembly may lack hard instruments it
doesnt mean that its decisions and declarations remain utterly without
effect. Countless general assembly declarations and recommendations are
passed to reach nearly universal acceptance. Though in case of
emergency sessions general assembly decisions are restricted to
recommendations and no enforcement measures are available. Members
of UN Human rights council decided by it and secy gen appointed on the
recommendation of secy council, members of secy council elected,
approves un budget, assesses fin sitn of member states, works with secy
council to elect ICJ judges.

UNDP Sustainable development, climate, democratic governance The

United Nations Development Programme is the United Nations' global development network.
Headquartered in New York City, UNDP advocates for change and connects countries to
knowledge, experience and resources to help people build a better life. It provides expert
advice, training, and grants support to developing countries, with increasing emphasis on
assistance to the least developed countries. UNDP works in nearly 170 countries and
territories, helping to achieve the eradication of poverty, and the reduction of inequalities and
exclusion. We help countries to develop policies, leadership skills, partnering abilities,
institutional capabilities and build resilience in order to sustain development results.

UNEP - The United Nations Environment Programme is an agency of United Nations and
coordinates its environmental activities, assisting developing countries in implementing
environmentally sound policies and practices. It was founded by Maurice Strong, its first director, as a
result of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment in June 1972 and has its
headquarters in the Gigiri neighborhood of Nairobi, Kenya. UNEP also has six regional offices and
various country offices. The United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) is the
leading global environmental authority that sets the global environmental agenda,
promotes the coherent implementation of the environmental dimension of
sustainable development within the United Nations system and serves as an
authoritative advocate for the global environment.
UNEP work encompasses:
Assessing global, regional and national environmental conditions and trends
Developing international and national environmental instruments
Strengthening institutions for the wise management of the environment

Non traditional secy threats terrorism, refugee crisis, climate change

Traditional secy issues- military threat

north south divide The NorthSouth divide is broadly considered a socio-economic and
political divide. Generally, definitions of the Global North include the United
States, Canada, Western Europe, and developed parts of Asia, as well as Australia and New
Zealand, which are not actually located in the geographical North but share similar economic and
cultural characteristics as other northern countries. The Global South is made up of Africa, Latin
America, and developing Asia including the Middle East. The North is home to all the members
of the G8 and to four of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council.

The North mostly covers the West and the First World, along with much of the Second World,
while the South largely corresponds with the Third World. While the North may be defined as the
richer, more developed region and the South as the poorer, less developed region, many more
factors differentiate between the two global areas. 95% of the North has enough food and
shelter.[1] Similarly, 95% of the North has a functioning educational system. In the South, on the
other hand, only 5% of the population has enough food and shelter. "It lacks appropriate
technology, it has no political stability, the economies are disarticulated, and their foreign
exchange earnings depend on primary product exports."[1]

In economic terms, the Northwith one quarter of the world populationcontrols four fifths of
the income earned anywhere in the world. 90% of the manufacturing industries are owned by
and located in the North.[1] Inversely, the Southwith three quarters of the world populations
has access to one fifth of the world income. As nations become economically developed, they
may become part of the "North", regardless of geographical location, while any other nations
which do not qualify for "developed" status are in effect deemed to be part of the "South".

Rwanda genocide - The Rwandan genocide, known officially as the genocide against the
Tutsi,[2] was a genocidal mass HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder"
HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_murder"slaughterof Tutsi in Rwanda by members of
the Hutu majority government. An estimated 500,0001,000,000 Rwandans were killed during
the 100-day period from April 7 to mid-July 1994,[1] constituting as many as 70% of the Tutsi and
20% of Rwanda's total population. After the Tutsi-backed Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF)
regained control of the country and ended the genocide, an estimated 2,000,000 Rwandans
were displaced and became refugees (most of the Hutus). [3] The genocide was planned by
members of the core political elite, many of whom occupied positions at top levels of the national
government. Perpetrators came from the ranks of the Rwandan army, the Gendarmerie,
government-backed militias including the Interahamwe and Impuzamugambi, as well as
countless ordinary civilians.

The genocide took place in the context of the Rwandan Civil War, an ongoing conflict beginning
in 1990 between the Hutu-led government and the Rwandan Patriotic Front (RPF), which was
largely composed of Tutsi refugees whose families had fled to Uganda following earlier waves of
Hutu violence against the Tutsi. International pressure on the Hutu-led government of Juvnal
Habyarimana resulted in a ceasefire in 1993, with a roadmap to implement the Arusha Accords,
which would create a power-sharing government with the RPF. This agreement displeased many
conservative Hutu, including members of the Akazu, who viewed it as conceding to enemy
demands. Among the broader Hutu populace, the RPF military campaign had also intensified
support for the so-called "Hutu Power" ideology, which portrayed the RPF as an alien force intent
on reinstating the Tutsi HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda"
HYPERLINK "https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda" HYPERLINK
"https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kingdom_of_Rwanda"monarchyand enslaving Hutus, a prospect
met with extreme opposition.

common and differentiated responsilbities -

LAST UPDATED:

12-29-2015

Alternate Title: CBDR

RELATED TOPICS

jus HYPERLINK "https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law"

HYPERLINK "https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
 "https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/jus-gentium-Roman-law"gentium
law of war
conflict of laws
political system
international law
environmental law
law
international criminal law
asylum
space law
Common but differentiated responsibilities (CBDR), principle of
international environmental law establishing that all states are responsible
for addressing global environmental destruction yet not equally responsible.
The principle balances, on the one hand, the need for all states to take
responsibility for global environmental problems and, on the other hand, the
need to recognize the wide differences in levels of economic development
between states. These differences in turn are linked to the states
contributions to, as well as their abilities to address, these problems. CBDR
was formalized ininternational HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" HYPERLINK
"https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-law" law at the 1992 United
Nations Conference on Environment and Development (UNCED) in Rio de
Janeiro.
CBDR resolves a tension between two older notions of environmental
governance. On the one hand, the idea of a common responsibility spoke
directly to the notion of common heritage of mankind, acknowledged by a
1967 UN resolution that had first emerged as an expression of concern for
the loss of natural resources belonging to all (especially maritime, such as
whales and tuna). The 1992 UN negotiations were organized around the
four key themes of climate change, deforestation, desertification, and
biodiversity degradationenvironmental problems whose global
repercussions brought home the need for a collective response, which
needed in turn to be grounded in a common responsibility. In legal terms,
CBDR describes the shared obligation of two or more states toward the
protection of a particular environmental resource. On the other hand, the
need to establish variegated levels at which different states can effectively
enter into a collective response, according to both their capacities and their
levels of contribution to the problem, had been recognized since the first
UN conference on the environment, in 1972 (it was featured explicitly in
theStockholm Declaration).
At the practical level, CBDR emerged at the 1992 conference as a
compromise between the positions of developed and developing countries
with regard to environmental protection. It aims at bringing about the
conditions of environmental governance that, to be effective, need to be as
inclusive as possible. At the ethical level, it is an expression of general
principles of equity in international law. It recognizes the historical
correlation between higher levels of development and a greater contribution
to the degradation of global environmental resources, such as water and
air, and enables the sharing of responsibility accordingly. It establishes that
developed countries, which had been able to develop for longer times
unimpeded by environmental restrictions, now need to take a greater share
of responsibility.
The various occurrences of the CBDR in international legal texts include
the Rio Declaration, where it is enunciated as Principle 7, and the United
Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, together with its
1997 Kyoto Protocol. It was retroactively incorporated into the Vienna
Convention and Montreal Protocol on substances that destroy the ozone
layer. Practically, it entails the deferral of developing countries compliance
with the objectives of these environmental conventions.
CBDR is not unanimously accepted among developed countries. At the Rio
negotiations it was rejected by the United States, which has since
conditioned its participation in any restrictive scheme on a specific
commitment from developing countries to participate as well (the 1997
Byrd-Hagel Resolution). As a result of this lack of consensus, CBDR has
been relatively sidelined in environmental governance debates.
chat FEEDBACK
G77 - loose coalition of developing nations designed to promote
its members' collective economic interests and create an
enhanced joint negotiating capacity in the UN.

South Africa suspended from un in 1974 from participating in its

work due to int'l opposition to the policy of apartheid. reinstated
back in 1994 after mandela becomes prez

[14:35, 9/13/2016] Indrajit Kar: '''Peacebuilding''' is an

intervention that is designed to prevent the start or resumption
of violent conflict by creating a sustainable [[peace]].
Peacebuilding activities address the root causes or potential
causes of violence, create a societal expectation for peaceful
conflict resolution and stabilize society politically and
socioeconomically.

The activities included in peacebuilding vary depending on the

situation and the agent of peacebuilding. Successful
peacebuilding activities create an environment supportive of self-
sustaining, durable peace; reconcile opponents; prevent conflict
from restarting; integrate civil society; create [[rule of law]]
mechanisms; and address underlying structural and societal
issues. Researchers and practitioners also increasingly find that
peacebuilding is most effective and durable when it relies upon
local conceptions of peace and the underlying dynamics which
foster or enable conflict.

[14:37, 9/13/2016] Indrajit Kar: '''Peacemaking''' is practical

[[conflict transformation]] focused upon establishing equitable
power relationships robust enough to forestall future conflict,
often including the establishment of means of agreeing on
[[ethical decision]]s within a community, or among parties, that
had previously engaged in inappropriate (i.e. violent) responses
to conflict. Peacemaking seeks to achieve full reconciliation
among adversaries and new mutual understanding among parties
and stakeholders. When applied in [[criminal justice]] matters,
peacemaking is usually called [[restorative justice]], but
sometimes also [[transformative justice]], a term coined by the
late Canadian justice theorist and activist [[Ruth Morris]]. One
popular example of peacemaking is the several types of
[[mediation]], usually between two parties and involving a third, a
[[facilitator]] or mediator.


Some geopolitical entities, such as nation-states and international

organizations, attempt to relegate the term peacemaking to
large, systemic, often factional conflicts in which no member of
the community can avoid involvement, and in which no faction or
segment can claim to be completely innocent of the problems,
citing as instances post-[[genocide]] situations, or extreme
situations of oppression such as [[apartheid]]. However
peacemaking is a universal and age-old approach to conflict at all
levels and among any and all parties, and its principles may be
generalized and used in many different kinds of conflicts.

The process of peacemaking is distinct from the rationale of

[[pacifism]] or the use of [[non-violent protest]] or [[civil
disobedience]] techniques, though they are often practiced by the
same people. Indeed, those who master using nonviolent
techniques under extreme violent pressure, and those who lead
others in such resistance, have usually demonstrated the capacity
not to react to violent provocation in kind, and thus may be more
highly skilled at working with groups of people that may have
suffered through violence and oppression, keeping them
coordinated and in good order through the necessary, often
difficult phases of [[rapprochement]].

[14:40, 9/13/2016] Indrajit Kar: Peace enforcement is the use of

military force to compel peace in a conflict, generally against the
will of those combatants.[1] To do this, it generally requires more
military force than peacekeeping operations. The United Nations,
through its Security Council per Chapter VII of its charter, has the
ability to authorize force to enforce its resolutions and ceasefires
already created.[2]

The Gulf War is an example of UN enforcement of its resolution

mandating the withdrawal of Iraqi troops from Kuwait.

Peace enforcement differs from peacekeeping as peace

enforcement activities are generally used to create a peace from
a broken ceasefire or to enforce a peace demanded by the United
Nations.[1][2] Compared to peacekeeping, peace enforcement
requires more military force and is thereby best done by heavily
armed forces.[1] However, it is generally unable to create lasting
peace, as it does nothing to deal with the underlying problems
which caused the conflict itself.[3]


One of the most famous examples of peace enforcement was the

UN intervention during the Gulf War to force Saddam Hussein's
Iraqi army from Kuwait. The United Nations was thereby able to
compel Iraq's compliance with the UN Resolutions which
demanded its withdrawal from the region.[2]

A report on peacekeeping and peace enforcement in the 1990s for

the United States Army established this difference between peace
enforcement and peacekeeping:

Peacekeeping, a role the U.N. has played over the years, is

relatively straightforward and, despite its difficulties,
comparatively easy. Peacekeeping involves monitoring and
enforcing a cease-fire agreed to by two or more former
combatants. It proceeds in an atmosphere where peace exists and
where the former combatants minimally prefer peace to continued
war. Peace-enforcement, as it is used by the United States Joint
Chiefs of Staff, entails the physical interposition of armed forces
to separate ongoing combatants to create a cease-fire that does
not exist. Boutros-Ghali, on the other hand, uses the term to refer
to actions to keep a cease-fire from being violated or to reinstate
a failed cease-fire. It is a subtle difference, but it does imply the
existence of some will for peace. The American version more
realistically portrays another, far more difficult matter. By
definition, in a situation for which peace-enforcement is a
potentially appropriate response, war and not peace describes
the situation, and one or more of the combatants prefer it that
way. This means that, unlike peacekeepers, peace enforcers are
often not welcomed by one or either side(s). Rather, they are
active fighters who must impose a cease-fire that is opposed by
one or both combatants; in the process, the neutrality that
distinguishes peacekeepers will most likely be lost.[4]

[14:42, 9/13/2016] Indrajit Kar: Peacekeeping by the United

Nations is a role held by the Department of Peacekeeping
Operations as "a unique and dynamic instrument developed by
the Organization as a way to help countries torn by conflict to
create the conditions for lasting peace."[3] It is distinguished
from both peacebuilding, peacemaking, and peace enforcement.

Peacekeepers monitor and observe peace processes in post-

conflict areas and assist ex-combatants in implementing the
peace agreements they may have signed. Such assistance comes
 in many forms, including confidence-building measures, power-
sharing arrangements, electoral support, strengthening the rule
of law, and economic and social development. Accordingly, UN
peacekeepers (often referred to as Blue Berets or Blue Helmets
because of their light blue berets or helmets) can include soldiers,
police officers, and civilian personnel.

The United Nations Charter gives the United Nations Security

Council the power and responsibility to take collective action to
maintain international peace and security. For this reason, the
international community usually looks to the Security Council to
authorize peacekeeping operations through Chapter VI
authorizations.[4]

Most of these operations are established and implemented by the

United Nations itself, with troops serving under UN operational
control. In these cases, peacekeepers remain members of their
respective armed forces, and do not constitute an independent
"UN army," as the UN does not have such a force. In cases where
direct UN involvement is not considered appropriate or feasible,
the Council authorizes regional organizations such as the North
Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO),[4] the Economic Community
of West African States, or coalitions of willing countries to
undertake peacekeeping or peace-enforcement tasks.

[14:43, 9/13/2016] Indrajit Kar: Peacekeeping refers to activities

that tend to create conditions that favor lasting peace.[1][2]

Dutch United Nations soldiers, part of United Nations Mission in

Ethiopia and Eritrea, monitoring the Eritrea-Ethiopia boundary.

Within the United Nations (UN) group of nation-state

governments and organizations, there is a general understanding
that at the international level, peacekeepers monitor and observe
peace processes in post-conflict areas, and may assist ex-
combatants in implementing peace agreement commitments that
they have undertaken. Such assistance may come in many forms,
including confidence-building measures, power-sharing
arrangements, electoral support, strengthening the rule of law,
and economic and social development. Accordingly, the UN
peacekeepers (often referred to as Blue Berets or Blue Helmets
 because of their light blue berets or helmets) can include soldiers,
police officers, and civilian personnel.[1][3]

The United Nations is not the only organization to implement

peacekeeping missions. Non-UN peacekeeping forces include the
NATO mission in Kosovo (with United Nations authorization) and
the Multinational Force and Observers on the Sinai Peninsula or
the ones organized by the EU like EUFOR RCA (with UN
authorization). The Nonviolent Peaceforce is one NGO widely
considered to have expertise in general peacemaking by non-
governmental volunteers or activists.[4]

[14:49, 9/13/2016] Indrajit Kar: The War on Terror (WoT), also

known as the Global War on Terrorism (GWOT), is a metaphor of
war referring to the international military campaign that started
after the September 11 attacks on the United States.[44] U.S.
President George W. Bush first used the term "War on Terror" on
20 September 2001.[44] The Bush administration and the western
media have since used the term to argue a global military,
political, legal, and conceptual struggle against both
organizations designated terrorist and regimes accused of
supporting them. It was originally used with a particular focus on
countries associated with Islamic terrorism organizations
including al-Qaeda and like-minded organizations.

Right to development and equality of opportunity

[22:07, 9/23/2016] Shivani Ma'am Hindu: Yes, you are right about the
voting count! It's just that please use the terminology " substantive "
issues for non- procedural matters

[22:08, 9/23/2016] Shivani Ma'am Hindu: Read article 27 of the UN

charter

What classifies under procedural matter can also be contested on the

ground whether it is procedural or substantive

[22:12, 9/23/2016] Shivani Ma'am Hindu: Initially it was decided by a

vote

[22:12, 9/23/2016] Shivani Ma'am Hindu: But post Cold War decisions
are arrived at by consensus

[22:13, 9/23/2016] Shivani Ma'am Hindu: Mostly procedural decisions

are- adoption of the agenda, an invitation to an individual to participate
in council meetings, adding a new item or adjournment of a meeting
Internationalism the doctrine that nations should cooperate more as
common interests are more important than the differences.